ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Disaster Health Literacy - development and validation of a short measurement instrument in German to supplement the HLS
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Measuring Perceived Social Support After Disaster: Development and Validation of the Perceived Social Support in Disasters Scale (PSSDS-28).Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: In many countries, promoting the ability to protect one's own life and health and to help oneself when faced with adversity is a cornerstone of disaster risk reduction. For this reason, the population must be able to access, understand, assess and apply the information necessary to do so. So far, there have been only a few attempts to define this so-called "Disaster Health Literacy" (DIS-HL), and there is a lack of easy-to-use instruments to measure it. The aim of this research was to develop such an instrument based on a conceptual framework and to report on its content and face validity. Methods: As an interdisciplinary and interinstitutional working group we applied a standardized approach to the development of instruments for social science survey research. Based on a scoping review, we constructed a conceptual framework and defined an items list. We conducted an online expert review ( Results: Based on suggestions from the literature, we defined DIS-HL and identified key components of the construct. In item development, we considered four cognitive dimensions (access, understand, appraise, apply), the heterogeneous information requirements before, during and after events, and three information task domains (prevention, acute response, access to care). Based on the experts' feedback and the results of the face validity assessment we reduced the original 15 items to 12 items. Furthermore, we made moderate adjustments to the content and language of the items and shortened the introductory text to improve clarity and comprehensibility. Discussion: Our research strongly supports the relevance and content validity of the short DIS-HL
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.